US government official decries censorship of content, calls kettle black.

The United States government leads the world in content removal requests to Google, as measured by specific items, according to the company’s latest transparency data report for the second half of 2011.

The data, which was released Monday, shows that American authorities requested over 3,800 items via court order. That's more than twice as many as the next country, Germany. Google says it complied with 40 percent of the American requests. In addition, over 2,300 items were requested from law enforcement or other means that did not involve a court order.

Interestingly, according to the Irish Times(reporting from this week’s Dublin Conference for Internet Freedom) Thomas Melia, deputy assistant secretary of state in the US Bureau of Democracy, told attendees that “too many governments were filtering, censoring content, taking down sites, and perpetuating Internet shutdowns.”

Removal requests on the rise

Given that various governments have different standards with respect to freedom of expression, privacy, and other content standards, Google has found that governments, even Western governments, are asking the company to remove content for plainly political reasons.

“It’s alarming not only because free expression is at risk, but because some of these requests come from countries you might not suspect—Western democracies not typically associated with censorship,” wrote Dorothy Chou, a senior policy analyst, in a Sunday evening blog post.

“For example, in the second half of last year, Spanish regulators asked us to remove 270 search results that linked to blogs and articles in newspapers referencing individuals and public figures, including mayors and public prosecutors. In Poland, we received a request from a public institution to remove links to a site that criticized it. We didn’t comply with either of these requests.”

Jillian York, the director of international freedom of expression at the Electronic Frontier Foundation said that this new data shows the increasing pressure from governments.

“This is particularly insidious because, in doing so, that content is not merely hidden behind a firewall but instead disappears entirely,” she wrote in an e-mail to Ars on Monday.

“Google's transparency is a good thing and other companies should follow in its footsteps, but transparency isn't always enough. Companies need to regularly evaluate their presence in certain countries and ensure that they're not complicit in human rights violations.”

Google will take down anti-Atatürk content, will keep passport flushing

Under its “Notes” section, Google pointed out that some countries are new to the takedown request party, including Bolivia, Czech Republic, Jordan, and Ukraine. India had a significant uptick in the number of takedown requests, up 49 percent. Meanwhile, both Turkey and Thailand asked for items to be taken down as they violated local laws against speaking out against Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (the founder of modern Turkey), and Bhumibol Adulyadej (King of Thailand), respectively.

But perhaps the best request was one from the Great White North.

“We received a request from the Passport Canada office to remove a YouTube video of a Canadian citizen urinating on his passport and flushing it down the toilet,” Google wrote. “We did not comply with this request.”

“We received a request from the Passport Canada office to remove a YouTube video of a Canadian citizen urinating on his passport and flushing it down the toilet,” Google wrote. “We did not comply with this request.”

“We received a request from the Passport Canada office to remove a YouTube video of a Canadian citizen urinating on his passport and flushing it down the toilet,” Google wrote. “We did not comply with this request.”

I find this really amusing. Is it really that bad in Canada now that you're pissing on your passport?

These numbers don't mean anything without context. I would need to see the specifics on the take down requests. If our goverment is having google take down links to terrorist bomb making websites should I be pissed? Are they having links taken down that should not be? Probably, but without any real information I can't make an informed decision if I should care about this or not.

“We received a request from the Passport Canada office to remove a YouTube video of a Canadian citizen urinating on his passport and flushing it down the toilet,” Google wrote. “We did not comply with this request.”

I find this really amusing. Is it really that bad in Canada now that you're pissing on your passport?

“We received a request from the Passport Canada office to remove a YouTube video of a Canadian citizen urinating on his passport and flushing it down the toilet,” Google wrote. “We did not comply with this request.”

I find this really amusing. Is it really that bad in Canada now that you're pissing on your passport?

Meh...he was probably too drunk to find a cenotaph to piss on, so he used the next thing that was available.

And no...It's not that bad up here yet. As long as we can get rid of the "conservatives" next election. But the options are almost as bad.

“We received a request from the Passport Canada office to remove a YouTube video of a Canadian citizen urinating on his passport and flushing it down the toilet,” Google wrote. “We did not comply with this request.”

I find this really amusing. Is it really that bad in Canada now that you're pissing on your passport?

It's nice up here.

It's actually so good, that he doesn't even want to travel out of the country any more. Hence no need for his passport.

Turkey and Thailand asked for items to be taken down as they violated local laws against speaking out against Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (the founder of modern Turkey)

1. Why would Thailand care about Atatürk?

2. More importantly, I was under the impression that Turkey, despite being an almost exclusively Muslim country, was a secular government with free speech protections. Atatürk, from what I've read about him, was a great leader, but even the greatest leaders are open to criticism. Nobody's perfect. Why does this law exist? Is it similar to the way the Armenian Genocide has never been acknowledged?

These numbers don't mean anything without context. I would need to see the specifics on the take down requests. If our goverment is having google take down links to terrorist bomb making websites should I be pissed? Are they having links taken down that should not be? Probably, but without any real information I can't make an informed decision if I should care about this or not.

Careful friend, that's an awfully slick slope.

Don't cast aside your freedom so easily; it is quite difficult to recover.

Turkey and Thailand asked for items to be taken down as they violated local laws against speaking out against Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (the founder of modern Turkey)

1. Why would Thailand care about Atatürk?

2. More importantly, I was under the impression that Turkey, despite being an almost exclusively Muslim country, was a secular government with free speech protections. Atatürk, from what I've read about him, was a great leader, but even the greatest leaders are open to criticism. Nobody's perfect. Why does this law exist? Is it similar to the way the Armenian Genocide has never been acknowledged?

1) The "respectively," refers to the fact that Turkey is concerned with the Atatürk issues, and Thailand about the king issues.

2) As per Google's Transparency Report: "We received a request from the Telecommunications Communication Presidency of the Information and Communications Technologies Authority to remove a YouTube video that contained hate speech and two other videos about Atatürk. We removed the video with hate speech for violating YouTube's Community Guidelines but did not comply with the rest of the request. In addition, we received two requests from the Telecommunications Communication Presidency of the Information and Communications Technologies Authority and a request from the Ankara Public Prosecutor of the Press Bureau to remove a total of seven YouTube videos, claiming that the videos violated law no. 5816 on crimes against Atatürk. We restricted Turkish users from accessing six of these videos."

Turkey and Thailand asked for items to be taken down as they violated local laws against speaking out against Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (the founder of modern Turkey)

1. Why would Thailand care about Atatürk?

2. More importantly, I was under the impression that Turkey, despite being an almost exclusively Muslim country, was a secular government with free speech protections. Atatürk, from what I've read about him, was a great leader, but even the greatest leaders are open to criticism. Nobody's perfect. Why does this law exist? Is it similar to the way the Armenian Genocide has never been acknowledged?

1) The "respectively," refers to the fact that Turkey is concerned with the Atatürk issues, and Thailand about the king issues.

2) As per Google's Transparency Report: "We received a request from the Telecommunications Communication Presidency of the Information and Communications Technologies Authority to remove a YouTube video that contained hate speech and two other videos about Atatürk. We removed the video with hate speech for violating YouTube's Community Guidelines but did not comply with the rest of the request. In addition, we received two requests from the Telecommunications Communication Presidency of the Information and Communications Technologies Authority and a request from the Ankara Public Prosecutor of the Press Bureau to remove a total of seven YouTube videos, claiming that the videos violated law no. 5816 on crimes against Atatürk. We restricted Turkish users from accessing six of these videos."

I completely glossed over the "respectively" and the part about the king of Thailand when I read the article. Thanks.

And wow, my view of Turkey has been altered significantly after reading that Wikipedia article.

“We received a request from the Passport Canada office to remove a YouTube video of a Canadian citizen urinating on his passport and flushing it down the toilet,” Google wrote. “We did not comply with this request.”

“We received a request from the Passport Canada office to remove a YouTube video of a Canadian citizen urinating on his passport and flushing it down the toilet,” Google wrote. “We did not comply with this request.”

lolwut. I want to find this video now.

I tried to find it to no avail. If you succeed, don't forget to share!

Turkey and Thailand asked for items to be taken down as they violated local laws against speaking out against Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (the founder of modern Turkey)

to the fact that Turkey is concerned with the Atatürk issues, and Thailand about the king issues.

2) As per Google's Transparency Report: "We received a request from the Telecommunications Communication Presidency of the Information and Communications Technologies Authority to remove a YouTube video that contained hate speech and two other videos about Atatürk. We removed the video with hate speech for violating YouTube's Community Guidelines but did not comply with the rest of the request. In addition, we received two requests from the Telecommunications Communication Presidency of the Information and Communications Technologies Authority and a request from the Ankara Public Prosecutor of the Press Bureau to remove a total of seven YouTube videos, claiming that the videos violated law no. 5816 on crimes against Atatürk. We restricted Turkish users from accessing six of these videos."

Why do I get the feeling that Attaturk wouldn't have liked this law? If he'd been done for anti-ottomanism prior to the founding of Turkey, then I can only imagine how different the world would be.

These numbers don't mean anything without context. I would need to see the specifics on the take down requests. If our goverment is having google take down links to terrorist bomb making websites should I be pissed? Are they having links taken down that should not be? Probably, but without any real information I can't make an informed decision if I should care about this or not.

When only the terrarists® can not have access to maekbombs internets, then the terrarists® have won. Now, if we're all in the same boat, how many more bombs can they make? The answer: None. None more bombs.

“We received a request from the Passport Canada office to remove a YouTube video of a Canadian citizen urinating on his passport and flushing it down the toilet,” Google wrote. “We did not comply with this request.”

I find this really amusing. Is it really that bad in Canada now that you're pissing on your passport?

It's nice up here.

It's actually so good, that he doesn't even want to travel out of the country any more. Hence no need for his passport.

Supposedly it's not even "his" passport. It says inside it that the passport belongs to the Government of Canada. You wouldn't like it if someone pissed on your papers and flushed them down the toilet, wouldn't you?

“We received a request from the Passport Canada office to remove a YouTube video of a Canadian citizen urinating on his passport and flushing it down the toilet,” Google wrote. “We did not comply with this request.”

I find this really amusing. Is it really that bad in Canada now that you're pissing on your passport?

It's nice up here.

It's actually so good, that he doesn't even want to travel out of the country any more. Hence no need for his passport.

Supposedly it's not even "his" passport. It says inside it that the passport belongs to the Government of Canada. You wouldn't like it if someone pissed on your papers and flushed them down the toilet, wouldn't you?

It depends. If I wrote that stupid analogy on my paper before giving it to them, I'd be delighted if they pissed on it and flushed it down the toilet.

These numbers don't mean anything without context. I would need to see the specifics on the take down requests. If our goverment is having google take down links to terrorist bomb making websites should I be pissed? Are they having links taken down that should not be? Probably, but without any real information I can't make an informed decision if I should care about this or not.

This is dangerous thinking. Just because something MIGHT be bad doesnt mean you ban it. Its like saying because someone was stabbed knives should be banned.

Once you stop thinking about your rights and give in to the boogymen of its the terrorist! or think of the children! you will suddenly notice later you have nothing left.

I rather they leave the 1% bad stuff up and not filter the 99% instead of filtering half of the 99% because of the 1%.

Turkey and Thailand asked for items to be taken down as they violated local laws against speaking out against Mustafa Kemal Atatürk (the founder of modern Turkey)

1. Why would Thailand care about Atatürk?

2. More importantly, I was under the impression that Turkey, despite being an almost exclusively Muslim country, was a secular government with free speech protections. Atatürk, from what I've read about him, was a great leader, but even the greatest leaders are open to criticism. Nobody's perfect. Why does this law exist? Is it similar to the way the Armenian Genocide has never been acknowledged?

1) The "respectively," refers to the fact that Turkey is concerned with the Atatürk issues, and Thailand about the king issues.

2) As per Google's Transparency Report: "We received a request from the Telecommunications Communication Presidency of the Information and Communications Technologies Authority to remove a YouTube video that contained hate speech and two other videos about Atatürk. We removed the video with hate speech for violating YouTube's Community Guidelines but did not comply with the rest of the request. In addition, we received two requests from the Telecommunications Communication Presidency of the Information and Communications Technologies Authority and a request from the Ankara Public Prosecutor of the Press Bureau to remove a total of seven YouTube videos, claiming that the videos violated law no. 5816 on crimes against Atatürk. We restricted Turkish users from accessing six of these videos."

I completely glossed over the "respectively" and the part about the king of Thailand when I read the article. Thanks.

And wow, my view of Turkey has been altered significantly after reading that Wikipedia article.

If Atatürk was alive today he would have been tried in the Hague for crimes against humanity. But that's a story for another day.

OT: I believe South Park summed this dichotomy fairly well: "Make war on others but protest against the war at the same time" aka having your cake and eating it too.

To quote the NRA: If free speech becomes criminal, then only criminals will speek freely.

Add guns to the list too.

As for the rest of it, I am just happy Google is so open. More open than many corporations. Good on them. It also must make China and other nations tickled pink that we take down more stuff off of the Internet than them. Total hypocritical actions on the US's part. What a joke. But are any of us really that surprised?

“We received a request from the Passport Canada office to remove a YouTube video of a Canadian citizen urinating on his passport and flushing it down the toilet,” Google wrote. “We did not comply with this request.”

I find this really amusing. Is it really that bad in Canada now that you're pissing on your passport?

It's nice up here.

It's actually so good, that he doesn't even want to travel out of the country any more. Hence no need for his passport.

That is what I was thinking. And the pee was simply using the ammonia to help dissolve and start breaking down the passport before flushing it down the drain.